Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Morgan Three Wheeler & Super 3 Morgan Customer Satisfaction survey

I got an email from my Dealer with a password and a link to an internet site with this text:


The Morgan Customer Satisfaction survey requires a password. If you do not know the password, please contact the factory on 01684 573### or email #####.######@morgan-motor.co.uk

By typing the password, I was able to access a questionaire, where I was asked a lot of questions about my Morgan and my problems etc. with her ( I call her Bluebelle).

So far, MMC is on its way to get a feedback from us customers.

Achim

Very encouraging. Together with Simon's recent update, it seems things are now happening on a number of fronts, which looks like a serious move by MMC to improve both their product and their customer relations. I feel sure that there can be some really positive outcomes if people can work collaboratively.

This has a very positive feel. I do hope we all get the opportunity to give feedback, positive or constructive.

Is this all down to Charles leaving? If not, why have things suddenly changed and the management are, at last, acknowledging that customers may have some knowledge of motor cars to impart?

Let's hope that we don't get any more studidly worded press releases blaming the Americans or a few moaning owners. I sometimes take unfair blame from my wife, but I won't be blamed for the bad design of parts of the Three Wheeler!

I know Steve Morris has had some stick since Charles' demise but I think it is a good step forward in the quality front.

I may be completely wrong but I wonder if Charles had still been involved with the Company, he would have been too arrogant to consider formal feedback?

I hope that the craftsmen and women are empowered to provide input to any quality drives. Often they see potential and real issues at the manufacturing stage so will have valuable input to any quality initiatives. They should be encouraged to call these out without any negative repercussions.
Also, 'we' need to set 'our' expectations of what can be achieved, in the short and medium terms, at the correct level.
Forgive me for this corporate phrase "how do you eat an elephant", answer "one bit at a time".

I could not agree more. Well said.

There will always be issues when assembling a machine from bought in components. Design will tend to take a back seat to practicalities and economies of scale. In the case of the Trads that manifests itself in a wide rear axle, because that's all there is, and to narrow every axle would cost lots of money.
The design compromise on the S1 - S3 Roadster was the sump, and I really do believe that this should have been re-engineered at the outset with a shallower wider sump, and shallower oil pick up. But the remainder of the Roadster design is well resolved. Yes there is an engine/bellhousing mismatch but it's something which has little impact on the engineering. And so the Roadster is a great car. The design compromise on my Plus4 is the cooling system, and again this should have been resolved when the current 2 litre engine was installed. Whether the coolant hose rubbing points are because earlier hoses are 'made to fit' we will probably never know, but this could be sorted out very easily with a minor redesign. In the end though, the opportunity for the owner to fettle these 'flaws' is a large part of the appeal - to some at least, and I don't think a car assembled the way Morgan do it can ever be totally sorted from day 1. The differences are what defines the product.
So - I'm not particularly commenting on the M3W, but I think this applies to the whole range.
Morgan run a LEAN system at the factory - the boards are evident in the workshops, and so any production concerns should be raised and fed up to management as part of the daily process.

[quote=
Morgan run a LEAN system at the factory - the boards are evident in the workshops, and so any production concerns should be raised and fed up to management as part of the daily process. [/quote]

Good that the factory are asking for feedback from the users of their products.
LEAN systems can be good if they're set up right, yesterday I was at a conference and there was a presentation on Materials Management, the speaker told us of a facility that he'd visited who had adopted LEAN to increase efficiency and reduce costs, apparently there were lots of very impressive graphs all over the place, when the speaker asked his guide how much they'd reduced costs by there was an embarrassed pause followed by "Oh, we don't measure that"

That's the problem with LEAN. It becomes 'for its own sake' and exists as nice graphs on a board. The Morgan ones though look to be more focused on (just) in time component management.